June 11, 2008. It was a big moment in this nation’s history, when Prime Minister Stephen Harper stood in the House of Commons and formally apologized to the surviving victims of Canada’s residential housing debacle. With a few expressions of surprise from some who thought Harper didn’t have the quality in any particular abundance, the PM received almost universal acclaim for the statesmanship that went into crafting and delivering a speech so conciliatory and emotional.
That is, almost universal. The PM is not without his critics, of course. But was the Prime Minister expecting one of the most vocal critics of his speech to be fellow Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre? And why wasn’t he even a little taken aback that Poilievre was apparently in such a rush to respond that he went on talk radio in Ottawa that morning to do it?
Among other things, Poilievre responded to the $4 billion compensation package that’s to be extended to the program’s survivors by remarking, “Now, you know, some of us are starting to ask, ‘Are we really getting value for all of this money, and is more money really going to solve the problem?’ My view is that we need to engender the values of hard work and independence and self-reliance.”
Just need to think this through for a minute.... By the time the Prime Minister of Canada delivers his Big Speech, the one everyone is waiting for, the one the national media has been building up to for a good couple of weeks in advance, someone on his own team has already been trashing it on the radio. Ask yourself: If I were Harper, exactly how politically dead would I make this asshole for pulling a stunt like that, and how bad would I make it hurt?
Yes, well, you’re not the prime minister and neither am I, because the next day in Parliament, when Poilievre stood to deliver his own apology, a 31-word utterance far more trite and vintage Conservative than that more recently witnessed, Harper just up and accepted his apology.
Yup, he endured a moment or two of discomfort, and that was that. Caught and released fish spend more time on the hook, and it’s one of the more confounding Conservative Moments we’ve seen lately.
Beyond the inflammatory nature of the words he spoke (classically Reform, and Alliance too, for a guy who’s not even 30) what does it say that Poilievere spoke first, completely out of turn, directly contradicting the PM before he uttered a word, and then was allowed to mend his fences so easily?
We’ve recently been led to believe that Harper and the PMO so thoroughly control the government’s communications strategy, and no one says a word if they haven’t okayed it first. It seems strange, therefore, that anyone would have to be told not to publicly contradict the prime minister just hours before he was to make a key speech, and stranger that anyone so totally lacking in common sense as to do such a thing wouldn’t end up turning on a spit at the next party fundraiser.
Maybe Harper doesn’t have the control that’s been ascribed to him. His managerial capability has taken a hit or two in recent times, thanks to former International Affairs Minster Maxime Bernier, and so there’s the possibility that the appearance of all that control might have been illusory.
Or maybe he mostly does have control, and the Conservative Party, being as safe a refuge for fag- and indian-haters as it ever was when it was called Reform or Alliance, is the sort of melting pot that’s impossible to keep the lid on in perpetuity. But even that theory doesn’t explain why the PM would tolerate such words, delivered with such impeccable timing, from one of his own MPs, unless he also tolerates the message they came with.
